Would this be a fair Compromise for the Smoking bans?

For Bars, Restaurants, Bowling Alleys and Casinoes.

Smoking for even numbered addresses on even numbered calendar days is permitted.

Smoking for odd numbered addresses on odd numbered calendar days is permitted.

If you are a smoker and its June 7th you would be looking for a business with an odd numbered address on the 8th you would be looking for a business with an even numbered address.

If you are a non-smoker and its the 7th you would be looking for a business with an even numbered address, on the 8th you would be looking for a business with an odd numbered address.

The application would ask the employee if he/she wanted non-smoking
days only, as it would be to the owners advantage

to hire non-smokers for their non-smoking days and smokers for their
smoking days.

Non smoking employees for non smoking days = no employees going out
side for 10 or 15 min cig breaks.

Employees who smoke, work on their smoking days = no employees going
out side for a 10 or 15 min cig break.

Its simple math for the owners if the employees don't have to step
outside they are inside waiting on customers.

I strongly believe the owner should have the right to decide, but that is not the case in a growing number of states.

Albeit, slightly complicated would this be a good compromise.

That would never work, not even in theory. So I want a job waitressing but I have to work at 2 different places because I can only work 3 or 4 days out of the week at the one place? What about the fact that some months have an extra odd numbered day in them? I say let the smokers figure it out, they did it back in the 80's when they banned smoking from the workplace and a lot of other public places.

Oh, and not to mention to try and keep a schedule like that organized?? I managed a retail store and it was hard enough to juggle who could work when without figuring in 'oh it's a smoking day so I can't have Suzie work, but this is her only day available this week so I guess it's screw Suzie'.

I don't think that there needs to be a compromise for smokers. I believe that what they've done in California, for instance, is a good thing and that there shouldn't be any smoking in restaurants or other places. Smoking is a poison that does terrible things to the body and the smell of smoke never leaves a place and the restaurant will always smell like smoke if they allow people to smoke inside.
Also, your math is flawed the number of non-smokers greatly out weighs the number of smokers so it would be unfair to implement a 50/50 split in jobs.

I think the only compromise is to allow the business owners to make the decision for their establishment and have it posted clearly at the door and leave it up to the customer to decide whether they want to frequent that establishment or not. In my state, any employee working over 4 hours is entitled by law to a 10 minute break. If they work 8 hours they are entitled to two 10 minute breaks and at least a 30 minute lunch. As long as they aren't taking extra breaks (most people I know don't) then they aren't costing the employer any more time than a nonsmoker. At the rate things are going, the next thing to be banned will be bars and serving alcohol at any restaraunt since that is contributing to illegal behavior.

Any of these may be a good compromise.
In Illinois, we can't smoke anywhere, any more.
What will they take away from us next? Freedom of speech?

Only compromise is to allow smoking again. In IL we are seeing the actual tally come in now. Before we had estimations now we got actual stats. Revenue since the ban is down 28%. Business closures will reach 34% by next year. How much fine revenue has the govt got? 0.0 Tax increases are predicted due to the unbalanced budget next year. Our taxes are supposed to rise by the largest margine in any states history. Good job anti smokers you killed the economy.